Baller Alert Entertainment & Lifestyle 
On Wednesday, a U.S. senator announced that he plans to object to the presidential election results when Congress counts the Electoral College votes next week, forcing those in the House and Senate to vote on if they will acknowledge the outcome, President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.
Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley was the first in the Senate to confirm his plan to object to the results on January 6.
However, Hawley’s objection will not alter the outcome of the election. Instead, it will only delay what is already known; Biden was victorious over Donald Trump in this year’s presidential election.
Nevertheless, the Missouri Senator’s decision will place his fellow Senate Republicans in a challenging position because they will have to either side with Trump or the voters.
Hawley informed reports that he made his colleagues aware of his plan before his announcement.
“I cannot vote to certify the electoral college results on January 6 without raising the fact that some states, particularly Pennsylvania, failed to follow their own state election laws,” Hawley said. “At the very least, Congress should investigate allegations of voter fraud and adopt measures to secure the integrity of our elections. But Congress has so far failed to act.”
Many Democrats have expressed their thoughts on Hawley’s decision, including Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, who blasted the Republican Senator’s plan to object. In his argument, he mentioned the numerous lawsuits initiated by the Trump campaign for voter fraud and how they failed in court. He added that Congress will ratify the Electoral College’s results and that on January 20, Biden and Vice-President-elect Kamala Harris will be sworn in.
“The effort by the sitting President of the United States to overturn the results is patently undemocratic,” the New York Democrat said. “The effort by others to amplify and burnish his ludicrous claims of fraud is equally revolting.”
“This is America. We have elections. We have results. We make arguments based on the fact and reason—not conspiracy and fantasy,” he added.
